Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What response they, the United States and Norway are making to the Sudanese Government's ban on all flights over Equatoria; and what action they will take to ensure the continuance of the United Nations-led Operation Lifeline Sudan and the safety of relief workers throughout southern Sudan.

Baroness Amos: We were concerned by the Government of Sudan's flight ban over Equatoria and made high level representations in Khartoum and to the Sudanese Foreign Minister when he visited the United Kingdom at the end of September. We and others urged the Government of Sudan to give all possible help to the United Nations and non-governmental organisations to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance. We therefore welcomed the Government of Sudan's decision to lift the flight ban on 7 October. We continue to be concerned at the number of flight denials to specific locations. Along with our EU partners we are continuing to raise this issue with the Government of Sudan.

Police Officers: Retention

Lord Janner of Braunstone: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they propose to take to encourage police officers not to retire after their initial 30 years' service; and
	Whether consideration has now been completed as to whether any changes are required to the power to postpone the retirement of police officers; and
	Whether they have decided on options that might be used to encourage suitable police officers to delay their retirements.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: As we stated in the Police Reform White Paper of last December, we recognise that the current police pension scheme lacks the incentives to encourage officers to stay beyond 30 years and we are looking at ways of modernising police pensions to make them more flexible and affordable for future entrants. Any changes affecting new entrants will, however, take time to work through. We have therefore also been considering more immediate measures to retain the important skills and experience of officers beyond 30 years under the current police pension scheme.
	The Police Negotiating Board (PNB) agreed in May flexible arrangements that would give managers in the police service scope to retain officers who are entitled to retire with maximum benefits where they so wish. The arrangements agreed by the PNB entail an officer retiring with a lump sum in the ordinary way and then being re-engaged in his or her previous rank where management consider that would be helpful. We are currently considering the details of these arrangements and the proposal that the scheme should initially be piloted in five forces.

Passport and Records Agency Annual Accounts

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Passport and Records Agency intends to publish its annual accounts for 2001–02.
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Passport and Records Agency accounts 2001–02 have been published today and copies of the report have been placed in the Library.

MigrationWatch Report

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their response to the MigrationWatch Report which demonstrates that in 2001, 97,500 asylum seekers, including their spouses and children, who should have been deported as a consequence of Home Office decisions, remained in this country.

Lord Filkin: We have noted the MigrationWatch UK report and will be considering it.
	Officials have discussed the calculation with MigrationWatch and are due to meet MigrationWatch to discuss the validity of the underlying assumptions.
	Information on asylum applications, decisions, appeals and removals in 2001 was published in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin Asylum Statistics United Kingdom 2001 on the Home Office
	Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

Asylum Seekers

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many of the asylum seekers within the United Kingdom in January, estimated as 24,000, have not been accepted; and how many have left the United Kingdom since January.

Lord Filkin: The number of asylum applications in the United Kingdom, excluding dependants, made in January 2002 was 6,575.
	The number of asylum applicants awaiting an initial decision at the end of January 2002 was 36,500, excluding dependants. The number of these applicants who have since been refused asylum and Exceptional Leave to Remain (ELR), some of whom have subsequently appealed, who have been removed since January (including returns under the voluntary return programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration (IOM)), is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost by examination of individual case records.
	It is also not possible to say how many of these applicants were refused asylum and ELR and (whether after an unsuccessful appeal or not) voluntarily left the United Kingdom without informing the Immigration Service.

Asylum Seekers

Lord Campbell of Croy: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people, having entered the United Kingdom, have applied for asylum this year.

Lord Filkin: Information on how many asylum applicants entered the UK in a specific period is not available.
	Excluding dependants, there were a total of 39,920 applications for asylum in the United Kingdom during the first six months of 2002, of which 26,925 applied in country. Including dependants, the total number of applicants was estimated to be 51,500.
	Information on asylum applications is published quarterly. The next publication will present statistics for the third quarter of 2002 and will be available from 29 November 2002 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www. homoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigrationl.html.

Asylum Seekers

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will set up a maximum period during which asylum applicants who are not charged with any offence may be detained; and, if so, what period they would consider appropriate.

Lord Filkin: There is no express statutory time limit on detention under the Immigration Act 1971 and we have no plans to set such a limit.

Asylum Seekers

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will give assurance that pregnant women will not be detained in custody for immigration or asylum reasons (unless awaiting deportation); and, if not, why not.

Lord Filkin: Pregnant women are not normally considered suitable for detention under the Immigration Acts unless there is a clear prospect of early removal from the United Kingdom and medical advice suggests no question of confinement prior to this.

Sri Lanka Asylum Seekers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether in April 2002 in Sri Lanka the Deputy High Commissioner, Peter Hughes, stated that the United Kingdom would not be removing unsuccessful asylum seekers until a lasting solution has been found to the ethnic conflict; and, if so, whether the statement is a reflection of government policy.

Lord Filkin: The Deputy High Commissioner was misquoted in April 2002. There has been no change in government policy regarding the removal of unsuccessful Sri Lankan asylum seekers. Indeed, removals were taking place to Colombo during the civil conflict in Sri Lanka and before the commencement of the ceasefire agreement and moves towards a peace settlement.

Sri Lanka Asylum Seekers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many Sri Lankans were removed to their country of origin in each quarter for each year from 1998 to and including 2002.

Lord Filkin: I regret that the requested information on the destination of persons removed from the UK is not collated centrally.
	The available information relates to the number of Sri Lankan asylum seekers removed. The latest available quarterly data are given in the table.
	
		
			  Qtr 1 2001 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 2002 
			 Sri Lanka 35 40 40 40 70 
			 (1) (2) (3)  
		
	
	(1) Estimates of asylum removals by nationality - principal applicants removed only. Includes persons departing "voluntarily" after the initiation of enforcement action against them and persons leaving under assisted voluntary returns programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration.
	(2) Persons removed to Sri Lanka or a third safe country.
	(3) Quarterly data not available prior to 2001.
	Figures are rounded to nearest five.
	Equivalent data about the number of Sri Lankans who were removed but who had not claimed asylum are not available.

Major (Retired) Christine Lloyd

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why Major (Retired) Christine Lloyd has been refused access to the Ministry of Defence consultant (now serving as the Deputy Director of Aviation Medicine) who assessed her in May 1996 as suffering from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, attributable to her service in the Gulf War; and whether any Minister has discussed, or will discuss, with the consultant his supportive opinion of 13 May 1996.

Lord Bach: The Deputy Director of Aviation Medicine was Head of Ministry of Defence's Gulf Veteran's Medical Assessment Programme (GVMAP) until 31 December 1996. It would be inappropriate for him to discuss Major (Retired) Lloyd's case with her as there is no longer a patient doctor relationship between them. The current head of the GVMAP is very willing to discuss the medical aspects of Major (Retired) Lloyd's case with her, or her representatives, provided she gives her written consent. It would be inappropriate for Ministers to intervene in clinical matters. They have not done so and have no plans to do so in this case.

Nuclear Test Veterans

Lord Ashley of Stoke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What account has been taken of new epidemiological studies in assessing the claims of nuclear test veterans.

Lord Bach: In response to concerns for nuclear test veterans about their health, two independent epidemiology studies were carried out on the Ministry of Defence's behalf by the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), in conjunction with the Imperial Cancer Research Fund. The results of these studies were published in 1988 and 1993 and showed that, as a group, participation in the British atmospheric nuclear tests has not had a detectable effect on the expectation of life or on the risk of developing cancer or other fatal diseases by those who took part.
	A third study has been undertaken by the NRPB into the incidence of multiple myeloma, other cancers and other causes of death among nuclear test veterans. The results of this study are expected to be published later this year.
	The results of no other epidemiological studies concerning nuclear test veterans have been made available to the Ministry of Defence.

Nuclear Test Veterans

Lord Ashley of Stoke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will now investigate the possible effect of genetic damage on the children and grandchildren of nuclear test veterans.

Lord Bach: There is no scientific or medical evidence that shows that the health or other physical problems suffered by the children and grandchildren of nuclear test veterans can be attributed to participation in the test programme.
	The recently published Seventh Report of the Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE) has dismissed ideas of a general link between paternal preconceptional exposure to radiation and childhood cancer. Current information on radiation health effects suggests that studies of cancer among people exposed to radiation are likely to provide a more sensitive means of detecting such effects than studies of their children.

Nuclear Test Veterans

Lord Ashley of Stoke: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will fund further studies to ascertain the possible damage to the health of nuclear test veterans.

Lord Bach: Two comprehensive independent studies involving some 21,000 nuclear test veterans showed that there is no evidence of excess illness or mortality among the veterans as a group which could be linked to their participation in the nuclear test programme. The results of a third study, which has looked at the incidence of multiple myeloma, other cancers and other causes of death among test veterans, are due to be published at the end of the year. There are no plans for any further studies.

A400M Aircraft

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether a turbo-prop engine is still to be fitted to the A400M aircraft; and, if so, whether a suitable one has been identified.

Lord Bach: The A400M aircraft will be fitted with turbo-prop engines. Airbus Military, as prime contractor, is responsible for selecting the aircraft engines. A decision has yet to be made.

A400M Aircraft

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Bach on 21 November 2001 (WA 145) whether they are able to give a more precise in-service date of the A400M aircraft than "around the end of the decade".

Lord Bach: The current in-service date (ISD) for the A400M is 2010. However, taking into account the fact the contract has not yet been activated, we will continue to keep the ISD under review.

English National Stadium Review

Lord Clarke of Hampstead: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they expect the final report of the English National Stadium Review to be published.

Baroness Blackstone: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport is today publishing the final report of the English National Stadium Review, led by Patrick Carter, and placing copies in the Libraries of both Houses. The report reflects the detail of the agreements concluded by all principal parties on the national stadium project on 26 September.
	My right honourable friend set out on 19 December 2001 in another place (Official Report, cols. 291–3) four tests which we expected the Football Association (FA) and Wembley National Stadium Ltd (WNSL) to meet before the offer of government support to the national stadium project could be confirmed:
	First, an independent assessment of the multiplex stadium construction contracts: this was undertaken by Cyril Sweett Ltd and copies were placed in the House Libraries in May. Since May the contract has changed from a design, construct and finance arrangement to a design and construct contract. Cyril Sweett Ltd has therefore reviewed the new contract and produced an addendum report that concludes the new contract remains value for money. I am placing copies of the addendum report in the House Libraries today.
	Secondly, as my right honourable friend explained in her 7 May statement in another place (Official Report, cols. 21–2), WNSL has made available to the Comptroller and Auditor General papers relating to the project.
	The third test is corporate governance changes to be made to produce a management structure capable of delivering a complex project within procedures acceptable to the public sector. In addition to the significant strengthening of the WNSL Board, already announced, a range of improved procedures are now in place.
	The fourth is confirmation that financial support was adequate and fully committed. As Patrick Carter's report sets out, this is now the case.
	Having reviewed the steps the FA and WNSL have taken since December last year and Patrick Carter's assessment of the progress made by WNSL, including his view that on balance our four tests have been met, we have confirmed the Government's support to the national stadium project which we had first offered in December. My right honourable friend has however also ensured that the public interest in the new national stadium is protected by stronger safeguards than those secured at the previous project's failed syndication in 2000.
	The time has come for Government to stand back as the project moves into the construction phase and is taken forward by the FA and WNSL. But, as Patrick Carter has noted, to safeguard the public interest, the project as a whole will require careful monitoring, and with Sport England and the London Development Agency we shall be putting in place new arrangements as recommended by the Office for Government Commerce.

Cumbrian Foot and Mouth Inquiry

Lord Inglewood: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to make a reasoned response to each of the recommendations of the Cumbrian foot and mouth inquiry.

Lord Whitty: The Government commissioned two independent inquiries into the foot and mouth disease outbreak of 2001, one on the lessons to be learned and the other a scientific review into infectious diseases in livestock by the Royal Society. A full government response to both these inquiries will be made later this year. The Government are taking into account the views and recommendations of the county council reports, including the valuable report from Cumbria, in making their response to the national inquiries but will not be replying to the individual recommendations.

Meat and Livestock Exports

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to start and increase British meat and livestock exports, following the removal of worldwide bans; and what funds are available for promoting such exports.

Lord Whitty: Exports of meat, meat products, livestock and genetic material can only take place with health certification which meets the importing country's requirements or, in the case of EU member states, which meets EU harmonised conditions. Health certification is in place for exports to EU member states and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) is working closely with the industry, including through the export certification user groups, to identify priority non-EU markets and to persuade the authorities in those countries to lift remaining restrictions. Defra officials have been active in persuading overseas authorities to accept UK exports again by corresponding with veterinary authorities overseas and have arranged for British embassies and high commissions to make representations and to follow up correspondence. In co-operation with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, through our network of British posts overseas, we have also launched a lobbying exercise of all host governments which continue to maintain a ban on British beef, meat and animal products. We have been, and will continue, supporting our livestock companies and associations at international trade shows and have arranged inward missions of Ministers and officials. We are devoting considerable resources to reopening markets and will continue to do so.
	Defra is also working closely with the industry to promote British meat, products and livestock exports at trade fairs and will have a presence at several overseas shows this year. Of the £2.5 million made available by Defra during 2001–02 for the foot and mouth disease recovery plan, some £750,000 was used by Food From Britain to promote and build exports of food, including meat and meat products. During the current year, of a further £500,000 provided for rebuilding the export market, around £350,000 will be used specifically for meat and meat products. The Meat and Livestock Commission, Defra's non-departmental public body responsible for promoting British meat and meat products at home and abroad, is very active assisting meat exporters to re-establish markets, especially in continental Europe.

Rural Poverty

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to appoint a "Tsar" or "Champion" with oversight of policy towards rural poverty in England and Wales.

Lord Whitty: The eradication of poverty in rural and urban areas is a high priority for this Government. My colleague the Minister of State for Rural Affairs, the right honourable Alun Michael, is working with colleagues on how to target rural poverty, which is often hidden in otherwise prosperous areas or widely dispersed. This is also being looked at by the Rural Affairs Forum for England.
	The Prime Minister appointed Ewan Cameron to the role of Rural Advocate with a remit to "argue the case on countryside issues and for rural people at the highest levels in Government and outside".
	The commitment to rural issues was spelt out in the Rural White Paper in November 2000 and is at the heart of policy-making in central government as reflected by the creation of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) with the specific objective of sustaining thriving rural economies and communities. Defra is working with other departments to ensure that rural needs are reflected in all their targets and delivery plans.
	In addition, the Countryside Agency has a statutory role to advise the Government on rural issues and to report on rural aspects of government policies.
	Rural policy in Wales is a matter for the National Assembly.

Horticulture

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider the policy of concentrating horticultural research and development work at the Warwickshire site of Horticultural Research International is providing maximum benefits for British horticulture; what was the outcome of the quinquennial stage 1 review; whether horticulture is receiving a fair share of total government support for research and development; and what plans and funds exist for basic research in horticultural matters.

Lord Whitty: The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) does not have a policy of concentrating horticultural R&D at the Wellesbourne, Warwickshire, site of Horticulture Research International (HRI). Work is placed at each of HRI's sites and with other contractors on the basis of the skills they are able to offer and the merits of their proposals.
	The report of Stage 1 of the Quinquennial Review of Horticulture Research International (HRI) was published on 23 September. It can be consulted on the science page of Defra's website (www.defra.gov.uk) or in the Library of the House. Stakeholders have been invited to provide comments on the report by 18 November before Ministers take final decisions about HRI's future.
	The Government are a substantial funder of horticultural research and development and spent over £18 million in this area in Great Britain in 2001–02. In the case of Defra, the horticulture budget accounts for 7 per cent (£9.9 million) of our total R&D budget (£131.3 million) this year. In cash terms, it is the third largest single programme after environmental protection and BSE.
	The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, the Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland all fund basic research of relevance to horticulture.

Habitats Directive

Lord Burlison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any changes are planned to improve implementation of European Community Directive 92/43/EEC (the Habitats Directive) where European protected species are found on development sites in England.

Lord Whitty: The Government have decided it is necessary to make improvements to the arrangements for the implementation of the Habitats Directive in respect of European protected species and the land-use planning regime in England.
	We are proposing, with the agreement of my noble friend Lord Rooker, Minister for Planning, to improve the protection afforded to these threatened species by integrating the requirements of the directive within the land-use planning process, ensuring consideration of all the relevant issues within the planning process rather than in two separate regimes. Officials in Defra and the ODPM have worked closely together in drawing up the proposals and a public consultation will be published shortly.
	The proposals should improve the implementation of the Habitats Directive by ensuring that planning authorities take the directive's provisions relating to European protected species, such as great crested newts, and bats, fully into account in considering development applications. The proposals will also reduce the regulatory burden on business by integrating the two regimes and thereby removing the need for a separate consent to be sought following grant of planning permission. It will therefore be a quicker, more streamlined and effective process.
	In the interim period. our department will continue to operate the licensing system for developments affecting the European protected species but with some administrative improvements.

East Midlands National Forest

Lord Gladwin of Clee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will report on the National Forest Company's progress in creating the National Forest in the East Midlands.

Lord Whitty: Copies of the National Forest Company's annual report and its accounts for 2001–02 have been placed in the House Libraries.

Sustainable Development

Baroness Hilton of Eggardon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will report progress on the outcome of the World Summit on Sustainable Development and its follow up.

Lord Whitty: The World Summit on Sustainable Development addressed some of the greatest challenges of our times. For over a year my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs had said the summit should be about more than just fine words. It should be about a step-change—a move from words to concerted action and implementation. And it was. The Secretary of State also made clear from the beginning that separate fora would take forward discussion on climate change and on trade, including trade in agricultural produce.
	So Johannesburg built on the success of last year's Doha talks on the new trade round, the Marrakech accords on climate change and this year's Monterrey conference on financing for development. It reaffirmed and strengthened the international community's commitment to sustainable development and reinvigorated the Rio Earth Summit agreements, as well as the UN Millennium Development Goals on poverty eradication. There are no silver-bullet solutions, no miracle cures. But what we do have is a new political commitment, momentum and energy for the attainment of a sustainable world.
	As in all negotiations, we were rightly ambitious, given the agenda we had. We judge the final deal reached between the 180 participating countries—for which the UK, led by the Prime Minister, negotiated hard—to be a successful outcome. We went to Johannesburg to make a concrete difference to people's lives. We believe that we succeeded. And, while I understand the disappointment of those who pushed us for more, I believe that what was achieved, taken in conjunction with the UN Millennium Development Goals, will, if implemented, represent a revolution in the lives of the poorest people on the planet and the beginnings of a revolution in how we treat the planet itself.
	The summit agreed an impressive plan of implementation. We agreed a new target to halve by 2015 the proportion of people living without basic sanitation. This will save millions of lives in developing countries, and support existing goals on safe drinking water and health. There are also new targets and timetables on chemicals, biodiversity, marine protection and fish stocks. These and other commitments will galvanise action and set standards for the next 10 years or more.
	The summit also agreed joint actions on reliable and affordable energy provision for the poor and urgently and substantially to increase the global share of renewable energy sources. The provision of energy is a prerequisite for the achievement of the millennium development goals. The summit did not set a global target for renewables, but even those countries which resisted a global target have nevertheless committed themselves to domestic action. At the summit the Prime Minister announced that the UK's Export Credit Guarantee Department will make available £50 million per year to renewable energy exports to developing countries.
	And on climate change, Johannesburg issued a ringing call for countries to ratify the Kyoto protocol. Three key developing countries—China, India and Brazil—recently ratified. And crucially, in his positive statement at the summit, the Russian Prime Minister Kasyanov again signalled that Russia is preparing to ratify the protocol. The Canadian Prime Minister, Chretien, said that Canada will make a decision on ratification later this year. We are hopeful that the Kyoto Protocol might enter into force in early 2003.
	Over 300 new partnerships were also launched at the summit, representing in excess of $235 million in resources. We are familiar with the idea of partnerships at home. But this is a bold new idea for the UN. These partnerships will be the unique inheritance of Johannesburg—they are not a substitute for multilateral commitments, but they will provide additional and complementary resources. For example, the EU Water for Life Initiative and the UK-led multistakeholder partnership for water and sanitation will support the delivery of the new sanitation target and the existing goals on safe drinking water and health.
	Johannesburg has given the global community a strong mandate for intensified action at global, regional and national levels. More fundamentally, it has forged close links between development and environment policy in the service of sustainable development. There is now a widespread agreement that development assistance should be directed at helping the poor and that it needs to be sustainable if it is to be of lasting benefit. Sustainable management of natural resources and of the environment are essential for poverty eradication. This now needs to be reflected in the poverty reduction and sustainable development strategies of developing countries.
	We shall work with our partners in the international institutions—the UN, the G8 and the OECD—to ensure that development and environment policy are mutually supportive. We need to ensure that the follow-up to Johannesburg, Monterrey and the Millennium Development Goals is coherent. International trade and climate change issues already have dedicated international processes of their own. On both, the UK Government are taking a lead role.
	The Prime Minister has hammered home the case for trade reform, especially of agricultural subsidies. Developing countries need improved market access so they can sell their produce fairly without being hampered by trade-distorting and environmentally-damaging subsidies in the developed countries. This is the single most important issue we need to follow up after Johannesburg. Improved market access and subsidy reform are a joint concern for development and environment policy. Currently OECD countries give around $55 billion in overseas aid but subsidise their agricultural industries by around seven times that amount. CAFOD has suggested that through the CAP the average European dairy cow gets a $2 subsidy a day—the same as the daily income of half the world's population. We will continue to push for reform of agricultural subsidies both within the WTO and, within the EU, on the common agricultural policy.
	And on climate change, later this month, the Secretary of State will be in Delhi for the next stage of the UN negotiations on implementation of the Kyoto Protocol.
	The implementation of the EU's sustainable development strategy will be a driver for change in Europe. In particular, it will need to reflect the summit agreement to develop a global 10-year framework of action programmes to accelerate the shift towards sustainable production and consumption. We need to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation—to get more from less. The industrialised North has agreed to take the lead on this and it must be central to the EU's strategy. This means action on a whole range of issues such as energy efficiency, waste minimisation—a real challenge for us in the UK—and integrated product policy.
	But equally important is action we will take at home. We will integrate the Johannesburg agreements and relevant follow-up into UK policy and action, with a sharp focus on the use of technological innovation to deliver sustainable development. If, as a nation, we achieve greater resource efficiency, this will not only help our environment but also improve our competitiveness.
	On energy, we are working towards our 10 per cent renewable electricity target by 2010. We are making great strides in both energy efficiency and tackling fuel poverty. On climate change, we have been leading globally in the Kyoto process. We are on track to meet our Kyoto target of a 12.5 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and have put in place a comprehensive programme of measures to meet our more ambitious domestic goal to reduce our emissions of carbon dioxide by 20 per cent.
	The Government will shortly publish an Energy White Paper that addresses how to set the UK on the longer term path to a low carbon economy, as the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution and others have recommended. In particular, the commission has recommended we put ourselves on the path to 60 per cent reductions in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. We will respond formally to that recommendation at the time of the White Paper, but already it is clear that action on that scale—in the UK and internationally—is what is necessary.
	And this autumn we shall be taking receipt of, and later responding to, the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit's report on how we manage waste, stemming growth and prompting recycling and re-use.
	Last week the Secretary of State hosted a meeting with leading UK stakeholders to discuss the follow-up action by government and stakeholders at UK level. This provided a useful forum for us to discuss the proposals developed by stakeholders and within government and to establish some shared conclusions on the implications of the summit.
	Our next review of progress towards sustainable development, which will be out early in the new year, will include further details on how we intend to take the Johannesburg outcomes forward. Over the course of the next year we will also be reviewing the UK sustainable development strategy and meeting our summit commitments will form a significant part of this.
	Perhaps the most innovative feature of the summit was the emphasis on partnerships between governments and civil society, particularly NGOs and business. The UK delegation therefore included Members of the House of Commons, representatives from the devolved administrations, local government, the UK sustainable development commission, from business and NGOs; and since this was a summit on the future, four youth representatives. Besides the formal government negotiations there was a wealth of other events and initiatives. UK participants were active everywhere and made a huge contribution to the overall outcome. Governments must take the lead in setting the framework for sustainable development, they cannot deliver it alone.
	Johannesburg demonstrated that it is possible to reach agreement on practical steps towards a more sustainable world. We must, and will, keep moving forward. In the words of the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, this summit will put us on a path that reduces poverty while protecting the environment, a path that works for all peoples, rich and poor, today and tomorrow. We have to go out and take action. This is not the end. It is the beginning.

Generic Medicines: Maximum Price Scheme

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have for the current statutory maximum price scheme covering generic medicines supplied for use in the National Health Service in primary care.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We are today announcing a review of the maximum price scheme. A copy of the consultation letter setting out the Government's proposals and timetable to roll the scheme forward, unchanged, has been placed in the Library.

Coastal and Inland Yacht Harbours

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will place in the Library of the House a copy of the code of practice for the design, construction and operation of coastal and inland yacht harbours issued by the Yacht Harbours Association.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The code of practice is not available through the Department for Transport, nor any other government department, so I am unable to place a copy in the Library of the House. However, I understand that the Library should be able to obtain a copy of the code from the Yacht Harbours Association for my noble friend and he may therefore wish to contact the Library.

Guide Dogs on Ferries

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will consult with other European Union states on legislation to make it obligatory for ferry companies to allow guide dogs to accompany their owners anywhere on their vessels.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The UK Government will be consulting shortly on removing the transport exemption in Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 which would have the effect of requiring ferry operators to take reasonable steps to change policies, procedures and practices which discriminated against disabled people. Policies on the treatment of guide and other assistance dogs are likely to be within the scope of the issues which operators would need to address. This proposal would require amendment to the primary legislation.

Marco Polo Programme

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they support the aims and objectives of the European Commission's proposed Marco Polo programme, designed to encourage the transfer of freight from road to rail or water transport.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The UK is committed to achieving an efficient and environmentally sustainable transport system, which is also the broad objective of the Marco Polo programme.
	The UK has succeeded in ensuring that the draft regulation makes an explicit link between the granting of aid and the attainment of measurable environmental objectives, that aid is subject to strict competitive safeguards and is finite in amount and duration. On this basis, the UK supports the programme.

Marco Polo Programme

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they support the budget proposed by the European Commission for the Marco Polo programme of Euro 115 million for the period 2003–07 for the whole European Union; whether they consider this sufficient to achieve a meaningful modal shift; and, if not, what budget figure is supported by the United Kingdom Government.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: The majority of member states were unable to accept either the European Commission's proposal for a E115 million budget for the first five years or a previous Presidency compromise of E85 million. At the Transport Council earlier this month, the current Presidency proposed a further compromise of E65 million. All member states accepted this final effort, but the Commission could not. Marco Polo has been returned to COREPER.
	The Government believe the latest Presidency compromise figure to be sufficient to achieve meaningful and measurable modal shift, subject to strict competitive safeguards.

National Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy

Baroness Gould of Potternewton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to publish the Government's consultation document on a national alcohol harm reduction strategy.

Lord Macdonald of Tradeston: It has always been the Government's intention to undertake an extensive process of consultation with stakeholders and relevant groups as part of the development of a national alcohol harm reduction strategy. Yesterday, jointly with my honourable friend Hazel Blears, we published a consultation document National Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy: Consultation Document setting out the areas on which the Govenment would welcome views. Copies of this have been placed in the Libraries of the House. The consultation period will run until 15 January and responses are sought directly to the Strategy Unit and Department of Health. We will also be holding a series of joint consultation events to seek the views of a range of stakeholders, including local authorities, police, crime and disorder reduction partnershps (CDRPs), NHS/ medical services (eg PCTs), education (schools sector), academics (university sector), voluntary sector, non-government organisations, the alcohol industry, users of treatment services and employers. Once the consultation period has closed the Strategy Unit will produce an interim analysis taking account of responses received.

Brixham Marina

Lord Corbett of Castle Vale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What modifications were undertaken by Marina Developments Ltd to the wave screen at Brixham marina, following the development of Prince William Quay and the replacement of a beach with a vertical wall, to ensure that the screen would achieve a suitable level of wave attenuation; and
	On what dates since it acquired the lease of Brixham marina has Marina Developments Ltd carried out (a) inspections and (b) maintenance of the wave screen; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Macdonald of Tradeston on 12 July (WA 114), who was commissioned by Torbay Council to undertake a detailed technical analysis of the wave screen at Brixham marina prior to its installation; and
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Macdonald of Tradeston on 12 July (WA 114), whether the provisions of the leases issued between the council of the borough of Torbay and Marina Developments Ltd, title no. DN 340649, in respect of Brixham marina; and the council of the borough of Torbay and Marina Developments Ltd, title no. DN 233714, in respect of Torquay harbour, are compatible with the objectives of their competition policy; and
	What action has been taken to date by the Health and Safety Executive in respect of inspection and reporting on the integrity of Brixham marina wave screen managed and maintained by Marina Developments Ltd; and
	Whether they will investigate and report whether the manager of Brixham marina wave screen and the commercial director of Marina Developments Ltd have taken any action to improve public safety at Brixham marina, specifically to prepare and secure the broken wave screen pile, since January 2002.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The Health and Safety Executive is not the enforcing authority for Brixham marina, this is the responsibility of Torbay Council.

Sir Desmond Morton

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether an official biography of Sir Desmond Morton is being commissioned.[HL
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Prime Minister has appointed Mrs Gill Bennett, who is a visiting Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, as the official historian to write the official biography of Sir Desmond Morton.

Car Parking Spaces for Peers

Lord Berkeley: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	How many car park spaces are provided in Old Palace Yard now compared with in July 2002; and how many spaces for Members are available elsewhere in the Palace of Westminster and adjacent car parks.

Lord Tordoff: The number of car parking spaces available to Peers is given in the following table:
	
		
			 Location July 2002 October 2002 
			 Old Palace Yard 61 64 
			 Palace of Westminster: Royal Court 26 26 
			 Palace of Westminster: Peers Court 6 6 
			 Palace of Westminster: Black Rod's Garden 15 *11 
			 Abingdon Green underground car park 59 59 
			  
			 Total 167 166 
		
	
	*Note: The number of spaces available in Black Rod's Garden has been temporarily reduced to accommodate equipment connected with the project to replace the main Palace boilers and air conditioning chillers.

Court Service Annual Report and Accounts

Lord Gordon of Strathblane: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to publish the Court Service annual report and accounts for 2001–02.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Court Service annual report and accounts for 2001–02 has been published today and copies have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.